Helpings of Hope Inc

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
472044547
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2025–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2023
Location
Indianapolis, IN, USA
Rating
91
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Adult, Continuing Education

Reported finances

Revenue
$50,085
Expenses
$326,989
Assets
$91,934
Liabilities
$1,196

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

6 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • KATHRYN BECKMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)

People named in this filing

  • KATHRYN BECKMAN (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR)
  • BETH DODSON (DIRECTOR)
  • JOSE LUSENDE (BOARD CHAIR)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

An organization dedicated to eliminating hunger and food waste creating food security via community-driven projects offering affordable nutritious food for those in food desert

What it reported doing in 2025

An organization dedicated to eliminating hunger and food waste while creating food security through community-driven projects that provide affordable nutritious food for people in food deserts.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Revenue has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 100
  • Transparency & Controls: 100
  • Sustainability: 17
  • Growth: 0

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 100%; rating input score 100
  • Program expense ratio: 100%; rating input score 100

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: -552.9%; rating input score 2; 2nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.28; rating input score 22; 22nd percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 24; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 56; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: -170.4% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: -120.6% per year; rating input score 0; 1st percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 100% of revenue deployed · 100% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 1 filed program accomplishment · $327K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 6 people listed
  • Consistency: 8 of 8 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: Resolved incoming and outgoing counterparties from filed money flows.
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Revenue growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 2/100.
  • High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 22/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 24/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 56/100.